Lucas: lessons on nuclear power from the Japan disaster

The lesson from the Japanese disaster is that you can never design out every possible human error, or natural accident, or unpredictable event. The problem with nuclear power is that it’s just so inherently risky. If a catastrophe does happen, then the impacts when we’re dealing with nuclear power are uniquely catastrophic, if you like, in a way that they’re not if we were dealing with the alternatives around renewable energy and energy efficiency, and so on. Of course, all of our thoughts are with the people of Japan, and particularly with those incredibly brave people who are at the plants now trying to bring them under control, but I just think that when we’ve got alternatives that are safer and cheaper, it does raise the question as to why we would run the risk with nuclear.

-“Wave and wind energy can’t be cheaper than nuclear, can it?”

Yes it can, and it is. If you look at the documents, that’s quite clear. Sometimes it doesn’t look that way of course, because nuclear’s very clever about not putting on its books the cost of decommissioning nuclear power at the end of its life. But if you add in those nuclear decommissioning costs, then nuclear is a lot more expensive. If we’re looking in Britain at the best way of being able to meet our carbon objectives, in terms of getting our emissions down to deal with climate change and keep the lights on, then it’s far cheaper, and government’s own statistics show this, to be investing in renewable energies and energy efficiency rather than nuclear. Of course the nuclear industry right now is engaged in a massive fight-back, trying to present itself as this nice clean energy of the future. I think the situation with Fukushima just shows us that that’s not the case, and it’s never been the case.

You can’t design out unforeseen circumstances. When they built those nuclear power stations 40 years ago, they never expected an earthquake of that size. Here in Britain, just back in the 1950’s, we had storm surges which were extraordinary and killed 300 people in East Anglia – you cannot predict what’s going to come in the future, and if there are alternatives, we should be using them. If it were genuinely the case that we had to make the choice between climate change and nuclear power, then of course the situation would be different, we’d have to look at it again. That’s not the choice we’re being faced with right now. You can never “design out,” whether it’s a terrorist attack, whether it’s human error, and when you’re dealing with something that’s as inherently risky as nuclear, it doesn’t make sense to take that risk.

Caroline Lucas MP, Green Party leader, on BBC Radio Sussex – 16 Mar 2011

Nuclear emergencies in Japan

Japan has 53 nuclear power stations, making it third largest nuclear power user in the world. As a result of the earthquake and tsunami there are emergencies at 5 of them, 10% or so of the total in the country. Its incredible that nuclear stations have been built - and on a large scale - in a place where many earthquakes, large and small, often occur. Its incredible that these nuclear stations - with their systems (protected by systems) which protect systems... - have failed unsafely on this large scale. We have been told that nuclear stations are designed to do the opposite, hardly failing at all and when they fail they fail safely. Its incredible that a country leaves itself so heavily dependent on this energy source - or any single energy source. Or, given the extremely dodgy history of the nuclear industry, and given the goals that motivate industrial societies, is it so beyond belief??

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12722719

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Japan

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-12723092

After the bombs dropped: Hiroshima and Nagasaki - Asia, World - The Independent

After the bombs dropped: Hiroshima and Nagasaki - Asia, World - The Independent

An exhibition documenting the impact of the nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II opens in London today.

Stopped clocks, flattened clothing, the charred contents of a tin lunchbox and a mangled glass bottle are among artefacts recovered from the wreckage of the two Japanese cities and brought to the UK for the first time to coincide with the 65th anniversary of the attacks.

The exhibition brings together first hand accounts of what took place on the 6th and 9th of August 1945 with objects representing the 340,000 people killed when the United States dropped two atomic bombs- events which led to Japan’s surrender from the war only days later...

Its the 65th anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima tomorrow and Nagasaki on 9th Aug. We then demonstrated the capability and willingness to deploy atomic weapons of mass destruction in a war situation, mass killing non-combatants on a scale and with a speed previously unmatched. We can kill on an even bigger scale now (there's 'progress' for you) and continue to regard the threat of mass destruction as acceptable and worth spending billions on to update systems. Presumeably the [growing number of] countries in possession of nuclear weapons are all willing to use them in certain circumstances. We cannot escape the consequences of our ethical choices - so lets hope nuclear disarmament proceeds ever more effectively and rapidly.